Text Size

-

+

reset

Defense Department spokesman Col. Steve Warren said Monday that questions about investigating or even prosecuting Bergdahl are premature.

“Our focus right now is to get Sgt. Bergdahl stabilized,” Warren told reporters. “There’s plenty of time in the future to look into the circumstance surrounding his disappearance and to make decisions on the way forward.”

As he fended off questions about any possible action against the Army sergeant, Pentagon Press Secretary Rear Adm. John Kirby said Bergdahl had already suffered mightily for whatever he may have done in 2009. However, the spokesman also reinforced the idea that the newly-freed soldier left his post before his capture.

“Let’s not forget, he was held captive as a prisoner for five years — five years by himself,” Kirby said on CNN. “That’s a pretty high price to pay for whatever impelled him to walk off that base.”

Fidell said the military should give Bergdahl Miranda warnings before questioning him about why he apparently left the base. “I think they have to give him warnings. This is not an emergency situation with a ticking time bomb,” Fidell said.

Asked by reporters about whether Bergdahl needed a lawyer to advise him on debriefings, Warren said: “You guys are way out front of where we are right now…. I’m not going to speculate on whether or not he needs a lawyer. Let’s just get him back.”

What of other U.S.-held prisoners?

The Bergdahl deal has grabbed headlines because of the involvement of the long-held American POW, but the war of words between Obama and Congress could just be a preview of fights to come over even bigger batches of prisoners at Guantanamo and at a U.S. run detention facility in Afghanistan.

Obama’s decision to phase out U.S. combat operations in Afghanistan by the end of this year has raised legal questions about the basis for keeping prisoners from that conflict locked up after the U.S. declares itself done with the war.

“There are a minefield of questions with regard to what happens to Al Qaeda detainees after combat in Afghanistan ends, but I can’t imagine anyone taking the position that we can continue to hold Taliban detainees in perpetuity after we pull out of Afghanistan,” said Stephen Vladeck, a law professor at American University.

International law dictates that the men should be released within a reasonable wind-down period after the conflict, meaning the value of the Taliban prisoners may have been dropping as the milestone of the end of U.S. combat operations nears. “If we’re talking about men who probably had to be repatriated by the end of next year, if not sooner, their value in exchanges like this is only going to decrease over time,” Vladeck said.

Obama has hinted repeatedly that those prisoners related to the Afghanistan conflict will have to be let go soon. The transfer of the five Taliban could be a harbinger of future releases.

While Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.) charged Monday that “arguably these five could be perhaps the most dangerous terrorists” at Guantanamo, one former official involved in discussions about the swap said the dangers posed by the men are being exaggerated.

“There’s too much emphasis on the extent to which they could rejoin the fight,” said the ex-official, who asked not to be named. “These guys could join the Taliban negotiating team,” the formal official added, noting that Afghan President Hamid Karzai once wanted one of the men to be part of a group engaged in peace talks.

While Obama seems intent on freeing Taliban fighters in the coming months, he has sent mixed messages about dozens of Al Qaeda detainees, some of whom are held at Guantanamo and some at a U.S. base near Kabul. He sometimes speaks about open-ended detention as an affront to human rights, but at other times alludes to a plan to bring to the U.S. some prisoners deemed too difficult to put on trial but too dangerous to release.

If it’s Sunday, is it a problem for Susan Rice?

The White House national security adviser once again finds herself in the middle of a controversy over comments on a Sunday talk show about what the administration did or didn’t do – and how it’s selling the story.

Speaking on ABC’s “This Week with George Stephanopoulos,” Rice said Bergdahl, “served with the United States with honor and distinction,” a statement that soldiers who served alongside him quickly challenged. That reignited the conservative criticism of Rice, who had to step out of the running for Secretary of State after delivering faulty talking points on the deadly Benghazi attack in September 2012 as the U.N. ambassador.

In a bit of deja vu, reporters pressed Carney at the briefing Monday to say whether the president stands by Rice’s comment. Carney referred the questions to the Defense Department, even though Rice is on the White House staff.

“The president stands by actions that he took as Commander-in-Chief to secure the release of the only member of the U.S. military held as a POW from either the Iraq or Afghanistan wars,” Carney said. “It was absolutely the right thing to do.”